I see many information products which are just a mix of existing material. Say for example, a lot of home study courses about marketing & copywriting have the 6 triggers in common... which were originally formed by Robert Cialdini.
As they say... there is nothing new under the sun.
Now, what is stopping me from buying 10 different WSOs in a particular category of IM and making a new product by "learning" from them? What's the difference?
If I have applied those principles and shared some of my own experience... that's OK. If I don't apply what I learn and just mix up all the content from other sources, that's bad is it?
They say: Preach what you practice...
But then have a look at the various schools and universities... the teachers and professors just teach what is in the books (which we can read ourselves) and they do not have a personal experience to add in most of the cases.
What do they actually do? Are schools and universities scams? :confused:
Perhaps what they do is transfer the knowledge from the books to the students in a more understandable manner.
Then what's wrong in taking an e-book or WSO and elaborating it so that it is more understandable by the buyers? They say that's a bad thing to do... in other words... copyright infringement.
So if one takes the info and converts into another format... say an article into video... that not plagiarizing? :confused:
Is it mandatory to mention the source everytime? Then I should be mentioning that each letter that I typed in here I learned from my kindergarten text book?
Is there any rule book which says whats right and whats wrong in a legal perspective? Where do I get it?
Sorry for the rant...
I just got frustrated when I read Dan Kennedy's book today!